[I am not subscribed to debian-kernel.]
On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 11:00:55AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Brian Thomas Sniffen writes:
> > It's a unilateral license. It can't mean anything but what he intends
> > it to mean.
>
> Reference, please? That is Alice in Wonderland logic ("Words mean
> exactly what I want them to mean, neither more nor less."). I hope
> that a license means what is written.
Welcome to the Wonderland that is copyright law.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2000/08/msg00147.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2000/09/msg00001.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2000/09/msg00013.html
To date, no one appears to have had the courage to challenge the University
of Washington's interpretation of "copy, modifify, and distribute" in court
(by subjecting themselves to a civil or criminal copyright infringement
suit). UWash later changed the wording of the license in question.
--
G. Branden Robinson | Do not attempt to disprove the
Debian GNU/Linux | four-colour theorem on your flag!
branden@debian.org | -- Josh Parsons
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature